Posted on 02/25/2004 3:31:26 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
Anybody interested in having an ongoing thread for the Religion section with reactions to "The Passion of the Christ"? If this is out of line, then moderator, please delete.
I saw the movie this afternoon. I am still digesting the experience, but I did think it was very good. It really did help to bring the Gospels to life, I think, although of course it is still a movie and one particular interpretation. I had some quibbles that I will mention later. The best thing is that whenever we hear about Christ dying for our sins and the merits of his passion and crucifixion, we now have a very realistic image to keep in mind. I think it will help in our devotions the same way that the Way of the Cross can. It had some of the beautiful iconic images that I was hoping to see. I thought Our Lady in particular was very good, a true Mater Dolorosa.
The critics who warned of anti-Semitism and violence are far from the mark, in my opinion. Having seen the movie, I have no desire to start a pogrom. I think most normal modern people seeing this will realize this is about an historical event and will not demonize the Jews as a people. The Jewish high priests and the other priests were quite impressive in their costumes. And it seems quite in keeping with the nature of things for them to try to protect their religious establishment and their orthodoxy by trying to get rid of this (from their perspective) blaspheming heretic who was calling himself a Messiah. Such type of thinking appears in many cultures and religions, as does the mob hysteria of the crowd. And of course Jesus and all his colleagues were all Jews, and there were Jews that helped and spoke up for Him, like Nicodemus and Veronica. The movie merely reports what the Gospels report, so the critics' argument, if any, is with the Gospels, not Mel. And the Gospels do not teach collective responsibility of the Jewish people as a people then or now for Christ's death, as we know from the Church's teaching in Nostra Aetate.
The violence was pretty graphic, but I would imagine quite authentically realistic. Sadly, sadistic law enforcement such as exhibited by the Roman soldiers has been quite common throughout history -- even in current times we have the example of Saddam's enforcers putting people through shredding machines and the like. The amount of suffering was consistent with Gospel accounts, and is certainly warranted if one considers that Christ's is the final sacrifice to atone for all of the world's sins. The graphicness of the passion is also consistent with the long tradition of meditation on the sufferings of Our Lord, e.g. St. Bridget of Sweden, etc. I also did not find it unendurable. I was worried before the movie, expecting it to be so given the reviews. Sure I looked away a few times when it did get to be a bit much, but I don't think any adults who are worried about squeamishness should be scared away. Think of it as Christ enduring what he must do for our sakes -- it is His mission. And you can always look away if it gets too much. And there are plenty of breaks, flashbacks and the like, so it is not relentless. And if all that still doesn't work, you can always remind yourself that, after all, this is just a movie and not the real thing.
I did have a few quibbles, such as the notion that Pilate and Christ would probably more like converse in Greek than in Latin, as Mel portrays. I also don't understand why the sign on the cross was not also in Greek (he just had Latin and Hebrew). Calvary was a very dramatic site, but Calvary in Jerusalem was not next to a ravine and was more of a hillock, I understand. However, I ascribe that to poetic license on Mel's part, which I think every director is entitled to to some extent. It also seemed like some bits were left out, e.g., drawing lots for the garments (perhaps that was implied somewhere and I just missed it), Christ telling the daughters of Jerusalem not to weap for him (although we saw them weeping), etc. But those are minor quibbles.
Anyone else care to share their thoughts and experiences?
As for the charge of anti-Semitism, I think the natural reaction to the film is for the viewer to desire to amend his life and avoid committing the sins which cause Our Lord to suffer so -- not to compound them by adding on new ones. The Jews that brought Him before Pilate and Herod are the ones who needed to convince them that He had broken Roman law and deserved death. Of course they will look bad. (Yet He forgives them.)
I particularly missed the consolation of the women of Jerusalem. We do see three (I think) soldiers gaming with dice at the foot of the cross. But the garment Christ was brought before Pilate in had been torn off His earlier.
The scouraging was really graphic, especially one of the lashes. You won't have to guess which one once you see it. I did think they did over do the scourging. Can't imagine anyone surviving it do to what would have been a massive loss of blood. Really dragged out Christ carrying the cross.
The visual impact of the entire movie is astounding and I doubt many people will sleep well after seeing this movie, but I suppose that is the intent.
For Christians who are familiar with the Bible, there is really no reason to see it a second time; so I doubt that the movie will benefit from people seeing it multiple times.
When I left the theater I thought that the ending could be used to set the stage for a sequel "The Resurrection of Christ" or some other similar title.
This will undoubtedly be a big box office hit, and even though I am a Christian; I think it would be fair to say that the acting is not so special that I would expect it to receive any major Oscars and maybe only a few nominations.
It is the story that makes this movie so special; a true story of the last hours of the life of Christ.
Went 1 1/2 hours before the 7 PM showing and found it had been sold out since 10:30 this morning. It was shown in 4 theatres in this one complex so I was shocked. Particularly since I come from Boston... I figure the way we vote means we are heathens! ;-)
I am so bummed out... until I couldn't get in I hadn't realized how much I wanted to see it. I'll have to find a time I can make and buy the tickets really early.
It was very graphic and of course violent but not nearly as violent as kid's video games and teen slasher movies.
I urge all Christians to see this movie and take someone with you! I hope this movie becomes a great tool for evangilization.
Not unlike Mel Gibson's "Hamlet."
I think it would be fair to say that the acting is not so special
I see your point -- this is definitely a director's movie rather than an actor's; but James Caviezel and Maia Morgenstern deserve a lot of credit for "becoming" their characters onscreen, which allowed all the other actors to react to them appropriately.
I disagree. Jim Cavaziel (sp?) and Maia Morgenstern were spectacular as Jesus and Mary. The woman who played Satan was also incredible. I don't expect any Oscar nominations though, Hollywood is far to wicked to do that.
Give a big "SPOILER" warning in the ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.